Due to storm/hurricane damage in 2008, my HOA decided that the roofs needed to be replaced. The HOA hired a contractor to replace the roof on each unit / townhome, including the detached garages, and each homeowner was charged $2,500. Apparently, the project was completed in January of 2009. In 2008, when the hurricane occurred, I was not at home. During the time that the roof was being replaced, I was not at home. Currently, I'm working in Iraq, which is where I live, and I have been in Iraq since August of 2005. I purchased the property in July of 2007 and have spent very little time there; 19 days per year, at the most. Up until January 2011 the house was vacant, with the exception of the19 days that I'm there. In January 2011 a renter moved in and he recently found damage in the attic. Several sheets of drywall had fallen from the rafters onto the floor. The drywall fell onto vents and onto the drywall directly above the master bedroom ceiling, which is now cracked and needs to be repaired. The drywall in the attic also acts as a firewall because the units have common attics. After the hurricane, once the area was reopened, the unit was inspected for damage, inside and out. At that time, no damage had occurred. The HOA was contacted about the damage, which included photographs, and I have been informed that I, as the owner, am responsible for all interior damage / repairs. The drywall did not fall by itself, it fell - when the roof was being replaced. The hammering of roofing materials, during the replacement of the roof, is what caused the drywall to fall. In my opinion, the HOA, or the roofing contractor, is responsible for the damages. The damage may be located on the interior, but the damage was caused by work that took place on the exterior. Since the drywall is the only means of a firewall, it needs to be replaced as well. Can you please tell me what recourses I have, and how to hold the HOA responsible for the repairs. The HOA Manager will no longer respond to my messages. Yesterday, I contacted the President / CEO of the HOA, which just happens to be a Texas Senator, and I doubt that I'll be hearing from him.
05/14/2011 |
Category: Real Property ยป Homeowner's ... |
State: Texas |
#24833
When a person fails to fails to uphold a duty of care and that lack of care is the cause of foreseeable harm to another, that person may be found liable for damages due to negligence. Negligence claims require the plaintiff to show the defendant owed a duty of care, that duty was not upheld, and that failure of care caused a foreseeable harm. The answer will depend on all the circumstances involved, such as the applicable school policy and whether the infected person was being treated.
In negligence cases, the most difficult issue to prove is often causation. In cases of illness, other causes of the illness need to be ruled out. Expert testimony of doctors and others may be used to prove the cause of the damage. It would need to be shown that the damage was the result of the defendant's actions or lack of care, and that there were not other causes or contributing factors which would entirely or partly relieve the defendant of liability.
Under the legal theory of respondeat superior, an employer may be held vicariously liable for the negligence of employees. Employers are generally only liable for acts of employees that fall within the scope of their job duties. However, there is case law which allows a victim to sue employers directly for their failure to monitor their employees, or failing to check them out before hiring them, or for failing to fire them after learning of their questionable conduct.
To hold the HOA responsible under the theory of respondeat superior, you would need to show that the roofers were employees rather than independent contractors. Otherwise, you would need to show that the roofing contractor failed to use ordinary care, and that there was no contributing factor, such as the hurricane, or the unoccupied nature of the residence. It is likely the contractor will claim there was a preexisting defect or weakness, and/or that if the unit was occupied at the time, the damage would have been discovered earlier, preventing a worsening of the damage.